Alright, imagine you're playing with your toy cars. There are two big players in the game:

1. **Waymo (Google's company)**: Waymo has been playing with self-driving cars for a long time and is really good at it. They take people in their special cars on rides without needing a human driver. They do this in some cities like Phoenix, San Francisco, and LA.

2. **Tesla**: Now, Tesla is another player that has these cool electric car toys. Their leader, Elon Musk, says they want to make self-driving cars too. Soon, they say they will start giving people rides in their special electric cars without needing a human driver. They might even do this next year!

Now, there's another company called GM who had a player called "Cruise". This was also supposed to be good at making self-driving car toys. But recently, GM said, "Hey, we're not going to spend money on Cruise anymore because it takes too long and costs too much." So now, they'll just make their cars with special helper features.

So, in simple terms, Waymo and Tesla are like the top two players trying to make and give rides in self-driving car toys. Read from source...

Based on a critical review of the provided text, here are some aspects that could be improved or addressed:

1. **Lack of Clear Structure and Focus**: The article jumps between different companies (Tesla, Waymo, GM, Cruise) and topics (autonomous vehicles, robotaxis, electric vehicles) without a clear introductory focus or structure.

2. **Repetition**: Some information is repeated multiple times, such as Tesla's plans for autonomous ride-hail services and the timeline of their Cybercab rollout.

3. **Biased Language**: The use of phrases like "Tesla's Autonomy Dreams" could be seen as denigrating or sarcastic towards Tesla's goals in the space.

4. **Lack of Analysis or Interpretation**: The article primarily presents facts but doesn't offer any analysis or interpretation of these facts. For example, it mentions GM stopping funding Cruise's robotaxi project, but doesn't discuss why this might be a significant development or what its broader implications could be.

5. **Inconsistent Tense and Verbal Agreement**: Some sentences switch between present and future tense (e.g., "Waymo is currently...", "Tesla’s Autonomy Dreams: Musk said...").

6. **Lack of Transitions**: The article uses few transition words, making the text feel disjointed and difficult to follow.

7. **Emotive Language**: Phrases like "fallen rival" are emotional and subjective, potentially biased, and could be rephrased in a more neutral way (e.g., "a significant competitor that has faced challenges...").

To improve the article, consider:

- Providing a clear introduction that outlines what the story is about.
- Organizing information into coherent sections or categories (e.g., by company or topic).
- Ensuring consistent tense and verbal agreement throughout.
- Using transition words to guide readers through the article.
- Avoiding emotive language and maintaining a neutral, fact-based tone.
- Including analysis or interpretation of key developments in the industry.

Positive. The article is primarily reporting on the developments and advancements in autonomous vehicle technology and services by major companies like Waymo, Tesla, and General Motors' Cruise. It mentions Elon Musk's confidence about Tesla operating driverless paid rides next year and does not contain any significant negative information or predictions about the industry or mentioned companies. Here are some key positive aspects:

1. Waymo expanding its autonomous ride service to more cities.
2. Tesla planning to start a ride-hail service with self-driving cars in Texas and California.
3. Tesla unveiling new vehicles (Cybercab and Robovan) for autonomous ride-hailing services.
4. General Motors focusing on developing its driver assistance technology Super Cruise.

These aspects contribute to the overall positive sentiment of the article.